INTRODUCTION xxi 



'Originally the names were longer, all being podites, from 

 coxopodite to dactylopodite ; to the use of these the philosophic 

 French still adhere, though the time-saving Anglo-Saxon has 

 for the most part rejected them ! . . . The more reasonable plan is 

 now to denote them by means of figures from first joint to seventh 

 joint.' 



As the antennae of the Lobster are homologous with podites, it is 

 a wonder that a hundred names had not been invented to designate 

 their hundred or more distinct joints. Why not have had also 

 a separate name for each hair on a man's head ? ! 



The followers of Galileo have had their revenge by pointing 

 out the innumerable absurdities of the teachings of the Church ; 

 but the turn of the Church may come, and it may have its revenge ! 



The mischief of all this is that the mass of mankind, even 

 in the most civilised countries, both men and women, are wholly 

 ignorant of the simplest facts of creation, and all these unnecessary 

 difficulties only increase their reluctance to have anything to 

 do with the wonders of nature. 



The craving for coining new words at every turn has already 

 landed us in a sort of mental chaos, and earnest thinkers see that 

 no advantage can come from this bewildering multiplicity of terms 

 towards a simplification of science. It only burdens the memory of 

 those who may be courageous enough to follow scientific pursuits, 

 without in the least making things clearer. 



Mr. James Geikie ^ says : ' When I attended school, the text- 

 books used by my teachers were about as repellent as they 

 could be.' 



And at p. 1 2 : ' Great care, however, should be taken to avoid 

 wearying the youthful student with strings of mere names.' 



When we find professors making fun of this so-called scientific 



^ Fragments of Earth Lore, p. i. 



